A seven year-old girl died just two hours after being sent away from hospital for the third time following repeated misdiagnosis.
Little Evelyn Smith was rushed to A&E by her parents last September after falling ill suddenly, suffering from a soaring temperature and vomiting.
The youngster was misdiagnosed and sent away from hospital and her GP's surgery.
After her terrified mum Helen took her daughter to see a doctor for the third time in three days, just two hours after being sent away, Evelyn collapsed and died at her home in Warwick.
An inquest into her death discovered she had died from a rare bacterial infection - Bacterial trachetis - as a result of croup.
Even though a doctor had diagnosed Evelyn with viral croup, they failed to recognise the deadly bacterial complications she was suffering from - and a coroner has ruled that Evelyn's death could have been prevented if she had been diagnosed and treated correctly.
Devastated Helen said: "Losing Evelyn has been totally devastating for us.
"She deteriorated so rapidly, even a year on it doesn't seem real. She was such a happy girl - a real livewire, so happy and always smiling. She's left a huge hole in our family.
"We took her to hospital three times in three days - we repeatedly returned for medical help and that should have been a red flag to doctors and nurses.
"I don't want any other parent to go through what we have been through. Trust your instincts - if you think there's something seriously wrong, insist that it is looked at."
The inquest, at Warwick Coroner's Court, head that Evelyn had woken up with a mild headache on Wednesday, September 11, 2013 - but still went to school that day and her ballet class in the evening. But at 2am the next morning, she came bursting into her parents' bedroom shouting that she couldn't breathe.
Helen rushed her to Warwick Hospital Accident and Emergency department, where her temperature had rocketed to almost 40 degrees. She was examined by a doctor, and despite vomiting, discharged a couple of hours later, with advice on how to reduce her temperature.
But when her daughter was still burning up on Friday morning, Helen took Evelyn to her GP surgery, where she was examined by a nurse, who prescribed her penicillin for her inflamed tonsils.
That afternoon her temperature had risen again and Helen took her back to the GP. Their Dr Susan Martin diagnosed her with oxygen saturations and moderate croup and made an appointment for her to come back on Monday.
Tragically, Evelyn collapsed and died at home two hours later leaving Helen to desperately give CPR while she waited for an ambulance to arrive.
At the inquest assistant coroner for Warwickshire, Dr Richard Brittain said: "Evelyn Mary Smith died from the consequences of both a viral and bacterial infection of her upper respiratory tract.
"Her family sought medical attention three times in the days leading up to her death. There were missed opportunities to diagnose and treat Evelyn appropriately on each of these occasions. However, I am satisfied that none of these consultations were neglectful.
Based on the evidence heard, it is more likely than not that her death was preventable; although it has not been possible to conclude the causative impact of each missed opportunity."
Among those giving evidence at the inquest was Warwick Hospital doctor Emma Sexton, who first examined Evelyn on the day before she died. She said the child did not appear to be displaying signs of respiratory distress and her cough sounded like a viral croup, although she had looked for symptoms of other conditions as well.
Dr Sexton added: "Bacterial trachetis is a very rare condition that arises from these symptoms. I had not come across it prior to this case."
Haidee Vedy, head of medical negligence at Alsters Kelley LLP, who represented the family at the inquest said: "Evelyn's death was an absolutely tragedy and should never have happened.
"Her family put their trust in the hands of the hospital and their local GP surgery and it would appear from the evidence presented at the inquest that they were badly let down.
"We will now be investigating further to find out what more could have been done to prevent Evelyn's death."
But at the inquest, Helen Lancaster, the director of nursing, who had commissioned an independent report which highlighted missed opportunities, did accept its findings.
Dr John Omany, medical director for NHS England (Arden, Herefordshire and Worcestershire), who oversee GPs' surgeries, accepted "opportunities were missed" to identify the seriousness of Evelyn's condition.
Mr Omany added: "We have looked into the circumstances of this tragic case and our priority now is to ensure that GPs across our area are aware of the dangers of croup.
"We have also contacted all GP surgeries and all out-of-hours providers to highlight some of the difficulties in identifying seriously ill children, and encourage them to refer children for specialist care as a precaution as soon as they have any concerns.
Evelyn's parents Helen and Trevor are now trying to raise awareness about complications of croup and encouraging parents to trust their instincts.
Helen Smith said: "When she first showed signs of being unwell, it was just a mild headache and that's something that all parents encounter.
"But when she burst into our room at 2am saying 'I can't breathe', that was when we knew it was something serious so I took her straight to A&E.
"We feel bitterly disappointed in the trust for failing to acknowledge that changes in their practice needed to be made to reduce the risk of deaths in the future.
"This has added unnecessary distress to our family. This was compounded by a total absence of any aftercare once we had left the hospital after Evelyn died."
This article is courtesy of the Mirror.
Regularly updated blog featuring news, articles and information relating to clinical/medical negligence.
Showing posts with label NHS Negligence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NHS Negligence. Show all posts
Friday, 19 September 2014
Friday, 12 September 2014
NHS faces huge compensation bill after dozens of patients were left with sight problems when it hired private firm to complete cataract surgery
A hospital could face a huge compensation bill after it hired a private firm to remove cataracts and half the patients treated suffered complications.
Musgrove Park Hospital in Taunton hired private provider Vanguard in May to help reduce a backlog.
But the hospital terminated the contract after only four days after 31 of the 62 patients who had the operation reported complications including blurred vision, pain and swelling.
One 84-year-old man claimed he has lost his sight and his family is calling for a full independent inquiry.
Some of the patients, including the 84-year-old man, have contacted lawyers to discuss seeking compensation, which raises the prospect of an NHS hospital picking up the bill for procedures done by a private health company.
Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust refused to talk in detail or discuss pay-outs when approached by The Guardian Newspaper, but a senior member of staff told the local newspaper that the hospital would be liable for any payments.
Colin Close, Musgrove Park’s medical director, told the Somerset Country Gazette: ‘Any financial responsibility would rest with us.
‘If any patients wish to pursue compensation, we would work with them.’
He added: ‘We still don’t know exactly what the cause is – we’re trying to identify that at the moment. There could be a range of causes.’
Dr Close said he would normally expect one in 400 patients to experience these complications.
A spokesman for Musgrove Park told The Guardian: ‘Due to the ongoing nature of our investigations it would be inappropriate for us to comment on the sequence of events surrounding the unfortunate complications experienced by our patients receiving cataract surgery with Vanguard Healthcare in their mobile theatre onsite at Musgrove Park hospital.
‘Our first and foremost concern has always been our patients, and particularly those who have experienced complications.
'We have been in very close contact with them since the incident to ensure they are fully informed with our progress and receive the highest quality aftercare and treatment.
'We will want to discuss the outcomes of our investigations with them first, once they have reached conclusion.’
Ian Gillespie, chief executive of Vanguard Healthcare Solutions, said: ‘Patient care is our number one priority and we’re working closely with the trust to understand and fully investigate the root causes of any complications.
‘This investigation is still ongoing, making it inappropriate to comment on specific issues or on individual patient cases.
'Operations were carried out in Vanguard’s operating theatre by highly qualified surgeons, approved by the hospital, and with many years’ experience of working in the NHS.’
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Musgrove Park Hospital in Taunton hired private provider Vanguard in May to help reduce a backlog.
But the hospital terminated the contract after only four days after 31 of the 62 patients who had the operation reported complications including blurred vision, pain and swelling.
One 84-year-old man claimed he has lost his sight and his family is calling for a full independent inquiry.
Some of the patients, including the 84-year-old man, have contacted lawyers to discuss seeking compensation, which raises the prospect of an NHS hospital picking up the bill for procedures done by a private health company.
Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust refused to talk in detail or discuss pay-outs when approached by The Guardian Newspaper, but a senior member of staff told the local newspaper that the hospital would be liable for any payments.
Colin Close, Musgrove Park’s medical director, told the Somerset Country Gazette: ‘Any financial responsibility would rest with us.
‘If any patients wish to pursue compensation, we would work with them.’
He added: ‘We still don’t know exactly what the cause is – we’re trying to identify that at the moment. There could be a range of causes.’
Dr Close said he would normally expect one in 400 patients to experience these complications.
A spokesman for Musgrove Park told The Guardian: ‘Due to the ongoing nature of our investigations it would be inappropriate for us to comment on the sequence of events surrounding the unfortunate complications experienced by our patients receiving cataract surgery with Vanguard Healthcare in their mobile theatre onsite at Musgrove Park hospital.
‘Our first and foremost concern has always been our patients, and particularly those who have experienced complications.
'We have been in very close contact with them since the incident to ensure they are fully informed with our progress and receive the highest quality aftercare and treatment.
'We will want to discuss the outcomes of our investigations with them first, once they have reached conclusion.’
Ian Gillespie, chief executive of Vanguard Healthcare Solutions, said: ‘Patient care is our number one priority and we’re working closely with the trust to understand and fully investigate the root causes of any complications.
‘This investigation is still ongoing, making it inappropriate to comment on specific issues or on individual patient cases.
'Operations were carried out in Vanguard’s operating theatre by highly qualified surgeons, approved by the hospital, and with many years’ experience of working in the NHS.’
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Wednesday, 3 September 2014
Dad was not told his cancer had spread until day before he died
A patient was not told his cancer had spread until the day before he died, a new report reveals.
The case is one of three complaints about care delivered by Coventry and Warwickshire hospitals which have been probed by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.
Yesterday, the ombudsman published a summary of its investigations for the first time to highlight cases concluded in February and March.
George Eliot Hospital in Nuneaton was investigated twice, and the trust in charge of University Hospital in Coventry once.
In one case bosses at George Eliot Hospital awarded compensation in relation to a male patient, referred to as Mr B, who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer.
The patient was admitted to the hospital when he became unwell and while there underwent a scan on his back.
The scan showed the prostate cancer had spread to his spine – but the patient was not told and Mr B was discharged home, growing more ill until he was eventually readmitted to hospital the following month.
It was only then that the patient and his family were informed that the cancer had spread.
Sadly Mr B died the next day.
His daughter later complained to the ombudsman about the lack of information, the fact her father’s pain was not managed properly in hospital and was not offered support to manage at home.
The ombudsman found in the daughter’s favour, ruling that the consultant in charge of Mr B’s care should have told him his cancer had spread before discharging him from hospital and that staff should have given the man better pain relief.
The ombudsman also found that Mr B should have been assessed for home care support.
The report says: “The fact that they did not do this meant Mr B was left without support when he needed it, which was distressing for his daughter to see. She now has to live with the fact that more should have been done for her father.”
The ombudsman also found the trust’s response to the complaint “inadequate”.
The trust has now acknowledged the failings in Mr B’s care and its handling of the complaint, paid the daughter £1,250 in compensation and drawn up an action plan for improvements.
In the second case, the ombudsman found doctors at George Eliot Hospital delayed acting on a patient’s low oxygen levels for as long as 12 days.
The patient, referred to as Mrs L, was admitted to the hospital at the end of 2011 for stroke rehabilitation and was discharged to a care home after a six-month stay.
She was readmitted to the hospital after five weeks and died a week later.
Her daughters complained the trust did not provide adequate care and that their mother was not in a fit state to be discharged, and complained that nurses did not administer oxygen properly.
The ombudsman found there was a 12-day delay in doctor’s taking action on Mrs L’s low oxygen levels, which the report says “fell so far below the applicable standards that it was a service failure”.
The ombudsman partly upheld the daughters’ complaint about doctors’ failure to treat Mrs L’s chest condition but found no other failings in the case of Mrs L.
Following the ombudsman’s final report, the trust wrote to the daughters to acknowledge the failing.
Kevin McGee, chief executive of George Eliot Hospital, said: “We welcome the publication of these complaints as we appreciate the need for transparency and to be held to account when mistakes are made.
“We have carried out thorough internal investigations and demonstrated to the Ombudsman that we have satisfactorily improved our procedures to avoid further similar problems."
The trust in charge of Coventry’s University Hospital has also been probed by the health service ombudsman.
The ombudsman found University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, which also runs St Cross Hospital in Rugby, failed to properly assess a male patient before discharging him from hospital.
The man, referred to as Mr B, suffered heart failure along with other chronic illnesses and was left to go home in a taxi.
He was readmitted to hospital the same evening but sadly died the following day.
The patient’s son complained his father was too poorly to leave hospital. He believed this led to his father’s death.
The son was also unhappy that his father was left to get a taxi by himself and no-one contacted the family to let them know.
The ombudsman found medical records supported the trust’s response that Mr B was medically suitable for discharge.
But the report says “it found that the trust should have assessed Mr B’s social needs before he was sent home to make sure he could get home safely and had support in place.
“We upheld this aspect of the complaint,” it adds.
On the trust’s actions following the ombudsman’s findings, the report continues: “The trust agreed to acknowledge and apologise for not assessing Mr B’s social needs, and the distressing impact this had on his family.
“It also agreed to confirm what action it had taken to make sure that assessments were carried out in future.”
The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman is the final step for people who want to complain about being treated unfairly or receiving poor service from the NHS in England, or a UK government department or agency. It investigated 2,199 cases in 2013/14 compared to 384 the previous financial year.
Andrew Hardy, chief executive officer at University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS trust, said: “On this occasion the ombudsman agreed that the patient was suitable for discharge but that the trust should have assessed their social needs before being sent home.
“The trust has further apologised to the family and provided them with a copy of our action plan in line with the recommendations made by the ombudsman.”
This article is courtesy of the Coventry Telegraph.
The case is one of three complaints about care delivered by Coventry and Warwickshire hospitals which have been probed by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.
Yesterday, the ombudsman published a summary of its investigations for the first time to highlight cases concluded in February and March.
George Eliot Hospital in Nuneaton was investigated twice, and the trust in charge of University Hospital in Coventry once.
In one case bosses at George Eliot Hospital awarded compensation in relation to a male patient, referred to as Mr B, who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer.
The patient was admitted to the hospital when he became unwell and while there underwent a scan on his back.
The scan showed the prostate cancer had spread to his spine – but the patient was not told and Mr B was discharged home, growing more ill until he was eventually readmitted to hospital the following month.
It was only then that the patient and his family were informed that the cancer had spread.
Sadly Mr B died the next day.
His daughter later complained to the ombudsman about the lack of information, the fact her father’s pain was not managed properly in hospital and was not offered support to manage at home.
The ombudsman found in the daughter’s favour, ruling that the consultant in charge of Mr B’s care should have told him his cancer had spread before discharging him from hospital and that staff should have given the man better pain relief.
The ombudsman also found that Mr B should have been assessed for home care support.
The report says: “The fact that they did not do this meant Mr B was left without support when he needed it, which was distressing for his daughter to see. She now has to live with the fact that more should have been done for her father.”
The ombudsman also found the trust’s response to the complaint “inadequate”.
The trust has now acknowledged the failings in Mr B’s care and its handling of the complaint, paid the daughter £1,250 in compensation and drawn up an action plan for improvements.
In the second case, the ombudsman found doctors at George Eliot Hospital delayed acting on a patient’s low oxygen levels for as long as 12 days.
The patient, referred to as Mrs L, was admitted to the hospital at the end of 2011 for stroke rehabilitation and was discharged to a care home after a six-month stay.
She was readmitted to the hospital after five weeks and died a week later.
Her daughters complained the trust did not provide adequate care and that their mother was not in a fit state to be discharged, and complained that nurses did not administer oxygen properly.
The ombudsman found there was a 12-day delay in doctor’s taking action on Mrs L’s low oxygen levels, which the report says “fell so far below the applicable standards that it was a service failure”.
The ombudsman partly upheld the daughters’ complaint about doctors’ failure to treat Mrs L’s chest condition but found no other failings in the case of Mrs L.
Following the ombudsman’s final report, the trust wrote to the daughters to acknowledge the failing.
Kevin McGee, chief executive of George Eliot Hospital, said: “We welcome the publication of these complaints as we appreciate the need for transparency and to be held to account when mistakes are made.
“We have carried out thorough internal investigations and demonstrated to the Ombudsman that we have satisfactorily improved our procedures to avoid further similar problems."
The trust in charge of Coventry’s University Hospital has also been probed by the health service ombudsman.
The ombudsman found University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, which also runs St Cross Hospital in Rugby, failed to properly assess a male patient before discharging him from hospital.
The man, referred to as Mr B, suffered heart failure along with other chronic illnesses and was left to go home in a taxi.
He was readmitted to hospital the same evening but sadly died the following day.
The patient’s son complained his father was too poorly to leave hospital. He believed this led to his father’s death.
The son was also unhappy that his father was left to get a taxi by himself and no-one contacted the family to let them know.
The ombudsman found medical records supported the trust’s response that Mr B was medically suitable for discharge.
But the report says “it found that the trust should have assessed Mr B’s social needs before he was sent home to make sure he could get home safely and had support in place.
“We upheld this aspect of the complaint,” it adds.
On the trust’s actions following the ombudsman’s findings, the report continues: “The trust agreed to acknowledge and apologise for not assessing Mr B’s social needs, and the distressing impact this had on his family.
“It also agreed to confirm what action it had taken to make sure that assessments were carried out in future.”
The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman is the final step for people who want to complain about being treated unfairly or receiving poor service from the NHS in England, or a UK government department or agency. It investigated 2,199 cases in 2013/14 compared to 384 the previous financial year.
Andrew Hardy, chief executive officer at University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS trust, said: “On this occasion the ombudsman agreed that the patient was suitable for discharge but that the trust should have assessed their social needs before being sent home.
“The trust has further apologised to the family and provided them with a copy of our action plan in line with the recommendations made by the ombudsman.”
This article is courtesy of the Coventry Telegraph.
Monday, 1 September 2014
The most devastating failures by public services revealed
A woman whose husband died hours after one of England’s biggest NHS hospitals missed several chances to diagnose his fatal condition was given just £2,000 in compensation, according to files published today, that highlight “devastating” failures by public services.
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust mistakenly said the man was suffering from a blood clot when he actually had a tear in the blood vessel from his heart to his body, which resulted in his death. The case is one of 81 anonymised summaries of complaints - 58 healthcare and 23 Parliamentary cases – revealed by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman so “valuable lessons” can be learned.
It is the first time the public can search the watchdog’s website to see the range of complaints it deals with. The Ombudsman investigated 2,199 cases in 2013/14 compared to 384 the previous year.
A geographical breakdown of healthcare cases showed that the East of England had the highest number of complaints dealt with between February and March this year with a total of 15. West Midlands’ hospitals received 13 complaints, East Midlands had seven and London six. The North East and South West had the fewest complaints with just one each.
The report said that regarding Mr F’s case in Birmingham, his symptoms were not typical for his condition, which made it more difficult to diagnose. It concluded: “However, the Trust missed several chances to correctly diagnose Mr F, including taking account of his previous medical history and unusual symptoms, carrying out a chest X-ray and misreporting a scan. While we cannot say that Mr F’s death was avoidable (because his condition was very serious), it is clear that the Trust lost the chance to give him treatment that might have prevented or delayed his death.”
In another case two Trusts failed to communicate effectively when a woman suffering from bladder cancer had her wishes for surgery ignored leading the watchdog to describe the last six months of her life as “wasted just waiting”. It concluded an “unacceptable delay” had taken place as Bedford Hospital NHS Trust and Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust could not agree on the best course of treatment, although the Ombudsman concluded that due to Mrs C’s condition the delays did not affect her prognosis.
The Trusts paid £1,750 compensation to Mrs C’s family “for the upset and frustration they experienced as a result of the poor care given to their mother”.
The Home Office was among the Government departments criticised in the files after a teenage asylum seeker spent 10 years in the UK without legal status waiting for his case to be decided. The 17-year-old applied for permission to stay with his mother, who had fled from her home country, but was told he would need to reapply after he turned 18 and was left in administrative limbo.
Repeated requests from his MP were also ignored by the Home Office until a decade had passed. He eventually received an apology from the Home Office and £7,500 compensation for the “serious mistakes” that occurred.
Ombudsman Dame Julie Mellor said: “Our investigations highlight the devastating impact that failures in public services can have on the lives of individuals and their families. We are modernising the way we do things so we can help more people with their complaints and to help bodies in jurisdiction learn from mistakes other organisations have made to help them decide what action to improve their services.
“We will continue to work with others including consumer groups, public service regulators and Parliament, using the insight from our casework to help others make a real difference in public sector complaint handling and improve services.”
A Department of Health spokeswoman said: “Listening to patients is one of the best ways to improve standards and we welcome this increased transparency around complaints. Hospitals should make sure patients, their families and carers know how to complain - including displaying information on the complaints system in every ward.”
Other cases
A woman in her late 90s died on the toilet at home in her granddaughter’s arms after doctor discharged her without examining her abdomen. She had perforated diverticulitis. Miss T complained to East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust and said that the Trust had failed to provide an adequate response regarding her grandmother’s death and had tried to ‘cover up’ its failings, but no evidence was found to support the claim. The Ombudsman recommended the Trust pay £500 in compensation for Miss T's distress.
Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust failed to spot signs of sepsis when Mr L arrived at hospital in the early hours of the morning from his care home. After being seen in A&E he was assessed as being safe for discharge back to his care home with some antibiotics, but died the following day. His wife complained to the Trust and said that if her husband had been admitted for treatment, he might have survived. The Ombudsman said because Mr L’s full diagnosis was not known, it could not say for certain whether his death was preventable. The Trust apologised and paid Mrs L compensation of £2,000.
A patient’s death from deep-vein thrombosis could have been avoided after a London GP practice failed to properly investigate her symptoms or refer her for further tests over two appointments. At both appointments the GPs who saw Mrs G failed to follow the relevant medical guidelines on investigating a possible DVT. They also failed to investigate her symptoms properly. The practice provided Mrs G’s relatives with evidence of what they had learnt from the complaint and apologised to them.
This article is courtesy of the Independent.
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust mistakenly said the man was suffering from a blood clot when he actually had a tear in the blood vessel from his heart to his body, which resulted in his death. The case is one of 81 anonymised summaries of complaints - 58 healthcare and 23 Parliamentary cases – revealed by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman so “valuable lessons” can be learned.
It is the first time the public can search the watchdog’s website to see the range of complaints it deals with. The Ombudsman investigated 2,199 cases in 2013/14 compared to 384 the previous year.
A geographical breakdown of healthcare cases showed that the East of England had the highest number of complaints dealt with between February and March this year with a total of 15. West Midlands’ hospitals received 13 complaints, East Midlands had seven and London six. The North East and South West had the fewest complaints with just one each.
The report said that regarding Mr F’s case in Birmingham, his symptoms were not typical for his condition, which made it more difficult to diagnose. It concluded: “However, the Trust missed several chances to correctly diagnose Mr F, including taking account of his previous medical history and unusual symptoms, carrying out a chest X-ray and misreporting a scan. While we cannot say that Mr F’s death was avoidable (because his condition was very serious), it is clear that the Trust lost the chance to give him treatment that might have prevented or delayed his death.”
In another case two Trusts failed to communicate effectively when a woman suffering from bladder cancer had her wishes for surgery ignored leading the watchdog to describe the last six months of her life as “wasted just waiting”. It concluded an “unacceptable delay” had taken place as Bedford Hospital NHS Trust and Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust could not agree on the best course of treatment, although the Ombudsman concluded that due to Mrs C’s condition the delays did not affect her prognosis.
The Trusts paid £1,750 compensation to Mrs C’s family “for the upset and frustration they experienced as a result of the poor care given to their mother”.
The Home Office was among the Government departments criticised in the files after a teenage asylum seeker spent 10 years in the UK without legal status waiting for his case to be decided. The 17-year-old applied for permission to stay with his mother, who had fled from her home country, but was told he would need to reapply after he turned 18 and was left in administrative limbo.
Repeated requests from his MP were also ignored by the Home Office until a decade had passed. He eventually received an apology from the Home Office and £7,500 compensation for the “serious mistakes” that occurred.
Ombudsman Dame Julie Mellor said: “Our investigations highlight the devastating impact that failures in public services can have on the lives of individuals and their families. We are modernising the way we do things so we can help more people with their complaints and to help bodies in jurisdiction learn from mistakes other organisations have made to help them decide what action to improve their services.
“We will continue to work with others including consumer groups, public service regulators and Parliament, using the insight from our casework to help others make a real difference in public sector complaint handling and improve services.”
A Department of Health spokeswoman said: “Listening to patients is one of the best ways to improve standards and we welcome this increased transparency around complaints. Hospitals should make sure patients, their families and carers know how to complain - including displaying information on the complaints system in every ward.”
Other cases
A woman in her late 90s died on the toilet at home in her granddaughter’s arms after doctor discharged her without examining her abdomen. She had perforated diverticulitis. Miss T complained to East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust and said that the Trust had failed to provide an adequate response regarding her grandmother’s death and had tried to ‘cover up’ its failings, but no evidence was found to support the claim. The Ombudsman recommended the Trust pay £500 in compensation for Miss T's distress.
Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust failed to spot signs of sepsis when Mr L arrived at hospital in the early hours of the morning from his care home. After being seen in A&E he was assessed as being safe for discharge back to his care home with some antibiotics, but died the following day. His wife complained to the Trust and said that if her husband had been admitted for treatment, he might have survived. The Ombudsman said because Mr L’s full diagnosis was not known, it could not say for certain whether his death was preventable. The Trust apologised and paid Mrs L compensation of £2,000.
A patient’s death from deep-vein thrombosis could have been avoided after a London GP practice failed to properly investigate her symptoms or refer her for further tests over two appointments. At both appointments the GPs who saw Mrs G failed to follow the relevant medical guidelines on investigating a possible DVT. They also failed to investigate her symptoms properly. The practice provided Mrs G’s relatives with evidence of what they had learnt from the complaint and apologised to them.
This article is courtesy of the Independent.
Friday, 29 August 2014
Compensation payouts to Northampton General Hospital patients total almost £24m
Compensation payments to Northampton General Hospital patients totalled £23.9 million over five years, latest figures showed.
Payments by year (rounded) were 2008/09 £3.7m; 2009/10 £3.1m; 2010/11 £6.6m; 2011/12 £5.2m; and 2012/13 £5.3m.
The hospital’s own figures also showed there were 44 new clinical negligence claims, for unspecified amounts, made between April 2013 and March 2014. NHS hospitals cannot reveal details about claims because of patient confidentiality and solicitors rarely give figures in relation their client’s compensation.
However, part of the £23.9m compensation – which is paid from an insurance-type NHS scheme rather than hospital funds – is likely to have gone to Martin Balfe, whose 62-year-old wife died when surgeons failed to spot a bile leak in June 2011.
It was later found this caused her organs to fail.
Meanwhile, the number of incidents staff believed had the potential to harm to a patient were 118 in 2013/14 compared with 76 in the previous 12 month. NGH said this was down to better reporting procedures, particularly around pressure ulcers.
Discounting pressure ulcers, ‘serious incidents’ rose from 47 to 54 in the 12 month period.
This article is courtesy of the Northampton Chronicle.
Payments by year (rounded) were 2008/09 £3.7m; 2009/10 £3.1m; 2010/11 £6.6m; 2011/12 £5.2m; and 2012/13 £5.3m.
The hospital’s own figures also showed there were 44 new clinical negligence claims, for unspecified amounts, made between April 2013 and March 2014. NHS hospitals cannot reveal details about claims because of patient confidentiality and solicitors rarely give figures in relation their client’s compensation.
However, part of the £23.9m compensation – which is paid from an insurance-type NHS scheme rather than hospital funds – is likely to have gone to Martin Balfe, whose 62-year-old wife died when surgeons failed to spot a bile leak in June 2011.
It was later found this caused her organs to fail.
Meanwhile, the number of incidents staff believed had the potential to harm to a patient were 118 in 2013/14 compared with 76 in the previous 12 month. NGH said this was down to better reporting procedures, particularly around pressure ulcers.
Discounting pressure ulcers, ‘serious incidents’ rose from 47 to 54 in the 12 month period.
This article is courtesy of the Northampton Chronicle.
Monday, 25 August 2014
Paramedics used out-of-date morphine to give pain relief
The North East Ambulance Service has reported itself to the Care Quality Commission after discovering its paramedics had given patients 75 doses of out-of-date drugs, including morphine.
Bosses at the NEAS said the problem was discovered during a routine audit of drugs earlier this year.
Ambulance officials said no patients had been put at risk due to the drugs being out-of-date but acknowledged that their potency to provide pain relief may have been impaired.
By the time ambulance bosses had realised they had a problem – and taken action to stop it happening again - a total of 75 doses had been administered by 26 paramedics.
he medicines dispensed by paramedics which were found to be out-of-date included two forms of morphine and a form of diazepam known as Diazamul.
Morphine is used to relieve severe pain that can be caused by heart attack, injury, surgery or chronic disease such as cancer.
Diazepam is used as an anti-anxiety drug, a muscle relaxant and as an anti-convulsant.
In a statement to The Northern Echo the NEAS said: “During a routine audit by NEAS, a number of out-of-date controlled drugs were found to have been administered to patients. In total 75 doses had been administered by 26 paramedics.
“The specific medicines were Morphine, Oramorph oral suspension and Diazamuls. No patients were put at risk due to the drugs being out of date, though their potency to provide pain relief may have been less effective.
“The Care Quality Commission and Monitor – a health watchdog – are aware of the situation, along with our commissioners.
“Since the error came to light we have tightened-up our controlled medicines checking procedures.”
A spokeswoman for the Care Quality Commission said: “We can confirm we were alerted by the NEAS in April.
"We asked them for an action plan and after reviewing that plan we were reassured that the actions taken by the trust to mitigate the risk were robust.”
But the CQC said their inspectors would be returning to the NEAS to make a follow-up inspection of how the trust was keeping drugs secure, including controlled drugs.
This followed an earlier visit by CQC inspectors to the trust in February which found the NEAS non-compliant in the storage of medicines.
This article is courtesy of the Northern Echo.
Bosses at the NEAS said the problem was discovered during a routine audit of drugs earlier this year.
Ambulance officials said no patients had been put at risk due to the drugs being out-of-date but acknowledged that their potency to provide pain relief may have been impaired.
By the time ambulance bosses had realised they had a problem – and taken action to stop it happening again - a total of 75 doses had been administered by 26 paramedics.
he medicines dispensed by paramedics which were found to be out-of-date included two forms of morphine and a form of diazepam known as Diazamul.
Morphine is used to relieve severe pain that can be caused by heart attack, injury, surgery or chronic disease such as cancer.
Diazepam is used as an anti-anxiety drug, a muscle relaxant and as an anti-convulsant.
In a statement to The Northern Echo the NEAS said: “During a routine audit by NEAS, a number of out-of-date controlled drugs were found to have been administered to patients. In total 75 doses had been administered by 26 paramedics.
“The specific medicines were Morphine, Oramorph oral suspension and Diazamuls. No patients were put at risk due to the drugs being out of date, though their potency to provide pain relief may have been less effective.
“The Care Quality Commission and Monitor – a health watchdog – are aware of the situation, along with our commissioners.
“Since the error came to light we have tightened-up our controlled medicines checking procedures.”
A spokeswoman for the Care Quality Commission said: “We can confirm we were alerted by the NEAS in April.
"We asked them for an action plan and after reviewing that plan we were reassured that the actions taken by the trust to mitigate the risk were robust.”
But the CQC said their inspectors would be returning to the NEAS to make a follow-up inspection of how the trust was keeping drugs secure, including controlled drugs.
This followed an earlier visit by CQC inspectors to the trust in February which found the NEAS non-compliant in the storage of medicines.
This article is courtesy of the Northern Echo.
Wednesday, 20 August 2014
Leeds hospital blunders revealed in report
Doctor wrongly removed a woman’s kidney after mistaking it for an ectopic pregnancy, a new report on serious incidents at Leeds hospitals shows.
Two patients also received adrenaline overdoses, there was an outbreak of MRSA among new mums and staff failed to respond when a patient deteriorated, according to the document.
It details 16 serious incidents recorded by Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust in May and June, with 11 of these pressure ulcers.
The report, by chief medical officer Dr Yvette Oade, says there has been an increase since 2013 in the number of serious incidents.
She said: “Whilst this reflects our reporting and learning culture, this is also attributable to a decision that we took to report all category 3 pressure ulcers as serious incidents from January 2014.”
In another incident, a woman was taken to theatre for removal of a suspected ectopic pregnancy, where a foetus implants outside the womb and cannot survive.
Before the procedure, the surgeon did not review a previous scan which showed one of her kidneys was in her pelvis.
“During the procedure the surgeon identified a structure thought to be the ectopic pregnancy, and removed this,” the report said.
However that was then identified as a pelvic kidney. The woman was not found to have an ectopic pregnancy.
After the error, staff were reminded of the guidelines for treating the condition and there was a meeting about the incident.
In two cases, patients were given too much adrenaline – one who was given ten times the prescribed dose then lost vision in one eye. The sight loss was later found to have occurred at the time of the overdose.
In another incident, a patient on the Critical Care Unit had been prescribed adrenaline at a rate of 5mls per hour following surgery, but it was mistakenly given at 50mls an hour. They needed further surgery but later recovered.
A further incident happened when a patient with diabetes began to deteriorate and was supposed to be monitored every two hours, but this did not happen. The next morning they could not be woken and were treated, but there were delays.
The patient continued to deteriorate due to their underlying illness and died the next morning. A post mortem confirming the cause of death is awaited.
There was also an outbreak of MRSA infection of the skin of mothers who had been discharged from the post-natal ward at LGI. Apologies were given to those affected.
In all cases, the incidents were investigated and moves made to prevent them recurring.
This article is courtesy of the Yorkshire Evening Post.
Two patients also received adrenaline overdoses, there was an outbreak of MRSA among new mums and staff failed to respond when a patient deteriorated, according to the document.
It details 16 serious incidents recorded by Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust in May and June, with 11 of these pressure ulcers.
The report, by chief medical officer Dr Yvette Oade, says there has been an increase since 2013 in the number of serious incidents.
She said: “Whilst this reflects our reporting and learning culture, this is also attributable to a decision that we took to report all category 3 pressure ulcers as serious incidents from January 2014.”
In another incident, a woman was taken to theatre for removal of a suspected ectopic pregnancy, where a foetus implants outside the womb and cannot survive.
Before the procedure, the surgeon did not review a previous scan which showed one of her kidneys was in her pelvis.
“During the procedure the surgeon identified a structure thought to be the ectopic pregnancy, and removed this,” the report said.
However that was then identified as a pelvic kidney. The woman was not found to have an ectopic pregnancy.
After the error, staff were reminded of the guidelines for treating the condition and there was a meeting about the incident.
In two cases, patients were given too much adrenaline – one who was given ten times the prescribed dose then lost vision in one eye. The sight loss was later found to have occurred at the time of the overdose.
In another incident, a patient on the Critical Care Unit had been prescribed adrenaline at a rate of 5mls per hour following surgery, but it was mistakenly given at 50mls an hour. They needed further surgery but later recovered.
A further incident happened when a patient with diabetes began to deteriorate and was supposed to be monitored every two hours, but this did not happen. The next morning they could not be woken and were treated, but there were delays.
The patient continued to deteriorate due to their underlying illness and died the next morning. A post mortem confirming the cause of death is awaited.
There was also an outbreak of MRSA infection of the skin of mothers who had been discharged from the post-natal ward at LGI. Apologies were given to those affected.
In all cases, the incidents were investigated and moves made to prevent them recurring.
This article is courtesy of the Yorkshire Evening Post.
Wednesday, 13 August 2014
Mother spent two years preparing to die after she was misdiagnosed with cancer
A mother has spoken of the 'absolute hell' she endured after being wrongly told for two years she had terminal cancer.
Denise Clark, 34, arranged her own funeral and wrote heartbreaking goodbye letters to her sons after she was told the disease would claim her life.
After being given the prognosis at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, she also spent £10,000 attending an alternative therapy clinic in Spain.
She hoped the treatment there would extend her life, giving her more time with her two young boys before she died.
But as the months passed and she continued to feel well, she became suspicious and eventually demanded another scan.
To her total shock, the results revealed the growth in her pelvis was not cancerous - but internal damage from previous cancer treatment she'd undergone.
Ms Clarke has now settled a claim for a high five-figure sum after she took action against NHS Grampian.
She said she hoped no-one else would ever endure the nightmare ordeal her family went through.
'I planned my funeral and wrote farewell notes to my boys. It was heartbreaking but I had to do it for my family. No one should have to do that if they don’t need to.
'Hearing them say it was a mistake was amazing - but it doesn’t give us back the two years of our lives that were made absolute hell.'
Ms Clarke's ordeal began in 2009 when she suffered bleeding, nine weeks into her pregnancy with son Luca, now four.
When she finally got an appointment for tests nearly six months later, in January 2010, she received the devastating news she had cervical cancer.
With the disease spreading, Luca was delivered at 33 weeks so Ms Clarke could start treatment as soon as possible.
She went on to beat the disease but in November 2011 she was told she had a huge, cancerous mass in her pelvis and there was nothing more doctors could do.
'They said I'd already had as much radiation as I could have in a lifetime,' she said.
'There was an option for some more chemo - which might buy me some time - but I wanted my boys to remember me how I was, and not rotting away on a couch.
'I was absolutely devastated. We just weren't expecting it at all.'
Desperate, she researched alternative treatments and booked herself into a special clinic in Spain to build her health up as much as she could.
She also began to plan for the future of her two sons, Harvey and Luca.
'I wrote them farewell letters to say how proud I was of them and told them not to be sad because of all the good times they had spent together.'
She even had family photographs taken to remind them of her.
'I wanted the boys to have fun times and lots of mum memories, like playing football together or having a barbecue. Nothing that cost a fortune.'
She added: 'I didn’t know if I was going to end up dying in a hospital, if I would be at home or how it would happen.'
Then after two years of agony, specialists revealed her recurring health problems were actually due to internal damage caused by high levels of radiation she'd received during her initial cancer treatment.
She said: 'The doctor was there with the test results and my mum burst out crying. I just started to laugh.
'Mum said "how can you laugh?", but it was out of relief,' says Ms Clarke, an oil firm operations manager.
'I got home and said to my son: 'Harvey, the doctors made a mistake, they are wrong". His little face just lit up and he was hugging me the hardest he has ever hugged me. He said he never wanted to let me go.'
She added: 'It's a massive relief they made a mistake and I'm OK - but that's two years of my life I'm never getting back.'
She also worries the misdiagnosis had forced her eldest son Harvey, now 10, to grow up too quickly.
'Even now he's still got worries in his head, he says he doesn't want to be without me and tells me not to leave him,' she said.
The misdiagnosis also led to her running up huge debts paying for alternative treatments and her marriage broke down due to the strain of her poor health.
During treatment, high doses of chemotherapy left her needing a blood transfusion and she suffered acute renal failure after medics unnecessarily inserted stents to maintain her kidney function.
Despite this, Ms Clarke added she has nothing but praise for many of the medical staff at the Aberdeen Royal Infirmity X-ray unit, but said she felt let down by NHS Grampian.
'It wasn't just one department that got it wrong, it was multiple departments. They made mistakes time and time again,' she added. Going through something like this gives you clarity on so much. All I want now is to see my boys grow up, and watch my babies become the men I know they will be.'
NHS Grampian refused to comment on the case, adding that it was a confidential matter.
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Denise Clark, 34, arranged her own funeral and wrote heartbreaking goodbye letters to her sons after she was told the disease would claim her life.
After being given the prognosis at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, she also spent £10,000 attending an alternative therapy clinic in Spain.
She hoped the treatment there would extend her life, giving her more time with her two young boys before she died.
But as the months passed and she continued to feel well, she became suspicious and eventually demanded another scan.
To her total shock, the results revealed the growth in her pelvis was not cancerous - but internal damage from previous cancer treatment she'd undergone.
Ms Clarke has now settled a claim for a high five-figure sum after she took action against NHS Grampian.
She said she hoped no-one else would ever endure the nightmare ordeal her family went through.
'I planned my funeral and wrote farewell notes to my boys. It was heartbreaking but I had to do it for my family. No one should have to do that if they don’t need to.
'Hearing them say it was a mistake was amazing - but it doesn’t give us back the two years of our lives that were made absolute hell.'
Ms Clarke's ordeal began in 2009 when she suffered bleeding, nine weeks into her pregnancy with son Luca, now four.
When she finally got an appointment for tests nearly six months later, in January 2010, she received the devastating news she had cervical cancer.
With the disease spreading, Luca was delivered at 33 weeks so Ms Clarke could start treatment as soon as possible.
She went on to beat the disease but in November 2011 she was told she had a huge, cancerous mass in her pelvis and there was nothing more doctors could do.
'They said I'd already had as much radiation as I could have in a lifetime,' she said.
'There was an option for some more chemo - which might buy me some time - but I wanted my boys to remember me how I was, and not rotting away on a couch.
'I was absolutely devastated. We just weren't expecting it at all.'
Desperate, she researched alternative treatments and booked herself into a special clinic in Spain to build her health up as much as she could.
She also began to plan for the future of her two sons, Harvey and Luca.
'I wrote them farewell letters to say how proud I was of them and told them not to be sad because of all the good times they had spent together.'
She even had family photographs taken to remind them of her.
'I wanted the boys to have fun times and lots of mum memories, like playing football together or having a barbecue. Nothing that cost a fortune.'
She added: 'I didn’t know if I was going to end up dying in a hospital, if I would be at home or how it would happen.'
Then after two years of agony, specialists revealed her recurring health problems were actually due to internal damage caused by high levels of radiation she'd received during her initial cancer treatment.
She said: 'The doctor was there with the test results and my mum burst out crying. I just started to laugh.
'Mum said "how can you laugh?", but it was out of relief,' says Ms Clarke, an oil firm operations manager.
'I got home and said to my son: 'Harvey, the doctors made a mistake, they are wrong". His little face just lit up and he was hugging me the hardest he has ever hugged me. He said he never wanted to let me go.'
She added: 'It's a massive relief they made a mistake and I'm OK - but that's two years of my life I'm never getting back.'
She also worries the misdiagnosis had forced her eldest son Harvey, now 10, to grow up too quickly.
'Even now he's still got worries in his head, he says he doesn't want to be without me and tells me not to leave him,' she said.
The misdiagnosis also led to her running up huge debts paying for alternative treatments and her marriage broke down due to the strain of her poor health.
During treatment, high doses of chemotherapy left her needing a blood transfusion and she suffered acute renal failure after medics unnecessarily inserted stents to maintain her kidney function.
Despite this, Ms Clarke added she has nothing but praise for many of the medical staff at the Aberdeen Royal Infirmity X-ray unit, but said she felt let down by NHS Grampian.
'It wasn't just one department that got it wrong, it was multiple departments. They made mistakes time and time again,' she added. Going through something like this gives you clarity on so much. All I want now is to see my boys grow up, and watch my babies become the men I know they will be.'
NHS Grampian refused to comment on the case, adding that it was a confidential matter.
This article is courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Friday, 8 August 2014
Bristol dentist pulled out wrong tooth in medical blunder!
A dentist pulled out the wrong tooth, while doctors operated on the incorrect area of a patient's hand in a series of errors at the trust which runs the Bristol Royal Infirmary. The University Hospitals of Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, which runs all of the city centre hospitals, has recorded two 'never events' since April.
These are serious blunders which should not occur if all proper procedures are followed, the trust said.
The first involved one patient, who was having multiple teeth removed, enduring an extra tooth at the back of their mouth being taken out unnecessarily. The patient was told about the mistake and offered to have the tooth re-implanted, but this was turned down.
A trust spokesman said: "During April and May, two events took place in our hospitals. One event took place in April and involved "wrong site surgery".
"During a multiple dental extraction, an additional tooth at the back of the mouth was removed instead of the adjacent one." He said a surgical safety checklist was completed prior to the treatment and the appropriate x-rays were on display.
He added: "The patient was informed of the error as soon as it was identified and an apology was given. Remedial treatment in the form of re-implanting the tooth was offered, but declined."
The following month another event was recorded at the same trust. This involved a patient having the ligament in their hands cut when they were supposed to be having surgery to release tension in their tendon.
A trust spokesman said: "A second 'wrong site surgery' event occurred in May, when an incorrect procedure was performed on a day- case patient. The patient was correctly identified and the correct hand operated on.
"However, the surgeon performed a carpal tunnel release instead of a De Quervain's release, a similar procedure. The patient was informed of the error as soon as it was identified and an apology was given. The patient elected to have the correct procedure the same day and it was performed uneventfully."
He added: "As we do with all serious incidents, the trust conducted a root cause analysis into both events to establish what happened, identify any learning and make recommendations for improvement actions."
Between April to May there were no similar events recorded at either North Bristol Trust, which runs Southmead Hospital, or at Weston Area Health NHS Trust, which run Weston-super-Mare's hospital.
This article is courtesy of the Bristol Post.
These are serious blunders which should not occur if all proper procedures are followed, the trust said.
The first involved one patient, who was having multiple teeth removed, enduring an extra tooth at the back of their mouth being taken out unnecessarily. The patient was told about the mistake and offered to have the tooth re-implanted, but this was turned down.
A trust spokesman said: "During April and May, two events took place in our hospitals. One event took place in April and involved "wrong site surgery".
"During a multiple dental extraction, an additional tooth at the back of the mouth was removed instead of the adjacent one." He said a surgical safety checklist was completed prior to the treatment and the appropriate x-rays were on display.
He added: "The patient was informed of the error as soon as it was identified and an apology was given. Remedial treatment in the form of re-implanting the tooth was offered, but declined."
The following month another event was recorded at the same trust. This involved a patient having the ligament in their hands cut when they were supposed to be having surgery to release tension in their tendon.
A trust spokesman said: "A second 'wrong site surgery' event occurred in May, when an incorrect procedure was performed on a day- case patient. The patient was correctly identified and the correct hand operated on.
"However, the surgeon performed a carpal tunnel release instead of a De Quervain's release, a similar procedure. The patient was informed of the error as soon as it was identified and an apology was given. The patient elected to have the correct procedure the same day and it was performed uneventfully."
He added: "As we do with all serious incidents, the trust conducted a root cause analysis into both events to establish what happened, identify any learning and make recommendations for improvement actions."
Between April to May there were no similar events recorded at either North Bristol Trust, which runs Southmead Hospital, or at Weston Area Health NHS Trust, which run Weston-super-Mare's hospital.
This article is courtesy of the Bristol Post.
Wednesday, 6 August 2014
Fears after NHS surgery mistakes
At least 35 patients have had the wrong part of their body operated on in the past five years, new figures reveal.
Errors include one patient having a needle thrust into the wrong side of their chest during an emergency procedure and several patients having the wrong part of their head operated on.
Patients' groups have hit out at the string of mistakes, saying it was both a tragedy and frightening such mistakes could happen.
Patients are visited by consultant surgeons and anaesthetists before operations and it is standard practice for medics to "draw" on the operation site before the patient goes into theatre.
The details of botched surgeries follow the revelation last month that the Scottish NHS spent more than £186 million on compensation in the past five years.
Four out of Scotland's 14 health boards admitted to operating on the wrong body parts. NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde admitted there had been 12 occasions in which staff had mistakenly operated on the wrong part of the body. Three involved operations on the head.
A document, released through the Freedom of Information Act, stated the patient's head had been "shaved, prepped, incision made and with the skin open a small amount of dissection was carried out on right side" when it should have been on the left.
NHS Lanarkshire said there had been two occasions when their staff had carried out procedures on the wrong part of the body. Both involved patients being treated for "squints" and they were given "injections to the wrong muscle" in their eye.
NHS Tayside revealed it had 20 incidents in which staff had incorrectly carried out operations or procedures on the wrong part of their body.
NHS Lothian admitted to "five or fewer" errors but refused to give details, claiming patients could be identified. Fife said it did not hold the details. The other boards said there had been no mistakes.
Jean Turner, executive director of Scotland Patients Association said: "The tragedy is that these are not just statistics, but people this has happened to."
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "While any surgical error is regrettable, it is important to put these figures in context as they reflect a tiny number of the 1.2 million procedures carried out safely each year.
"We have witnessed a 23 per cent reduction in surgical mortality since 2008, have implemented the World Health Organisation surgical checklist and are committed to further improvements."
This article is courtesy of the Herald Scotland.
Errors include one patient having a needle thrust into the wrong side of their chest during an emergency procedure and several patients having the wrong part of their head operated on.
Patients' groups have hit out at the string of mistakes, saying it was both a tragedy and frightening such mistakes could happen.
Patients are visited by consultant surgeons and anaesthetists before operations and it is standard practice for medics to "draw" on the operation site before the patient goes into theatre.
The details of botched surgeries follow the revelation last month that the Scottish NHS spent more than £186 million on compensation in the past five years.
Four out of Scotland's 14 health boards admitted to operating on the wrong body parts. NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde admitted there had been 12 occasions in which staff had mistakenly operated on the wrong part of the body. Three involved operations on the head.
A document, released through the Freedom of Information Act, stated the patient's head had been "shaved, prepped, incision made and with the skin open a small amount of dissection was carried out on right side" when it should have been on the left.
NHS Lanarkshire said there had been two occasions when their staff had carried out procedures on the wrong part of the body. Both involved patients being treated for "squints" and they were given "injections to the wrong muscle" in their eye.
NHS Tayside revealed it had 20 incidents in which staff had incorrectly carried out operations or procedures on the wrong part of their body.
NHS Lothian admitted to "five or fewer" errors but refused to give details, claiming patients could be identified. Fife said it did not hold the details. The other boards said there had been no mistakes.
Jean Turner, executive director of Scotland Patients Association said: "The tragedy is that these are not just statistics, but people this has happened to."
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "While any surgical error is regrettable, it is important to put these figures in context as they reflect a tiny number of the 1.2 million procedures carried out safely each year.
"We have witnessed a 23 per cent reduction in surgical mortality since 2008, have implemented the World Health Organisation surgical checklist and are committed to further improvements."
This article is courtesy of the Herald Scotland.
Friday, 18 July 2014
Hospital apologises for failings after schoolboy died on his 13th birthday
Hospital bosses have apologised for their care of a talented young footballer who died of meningitis on his 13th birthday.
Thomas Smith, from Hednesford, near Cannock, was nicknamed Ronnie by friends who compared his soccer skills to those of Cristiano Ronaldo.
But he fell ill with meningitis during a family holiday to Wales – and died on May 29 last year after being given paracetemol instead of antibiotics.
A coroner yesterday condemned Prince Charles Hospital in Merthyr Tydfil over the error as the teenager’s inquest ended.
Christopher Woolley said: “The failure to administer antibiotics amounts to a gross failure of care.
“Antibiotics should have been given without delay. Where meningitis is suspected it’s essential antibiotics are given immediately. The need for basic medical attention in this form was obvious. The risk of giving unnecessary medication was outweighed by the risk of Thomas having bacterial meningitis.”
Mr Woolley said he was also concerned about “further deaths” at Prince Charles Hospital and ordered a report.
But he said it was not a case of “neglect” and, even if Thomas had been given antibiotics, he would probably have still died.
Mr Woolley recorded a conclusion of death by natural causes.
The inquest earlier heard Thomas complained of six tell-tale signs of meningitis, including a headache and a stiff neck.
But doctors failed to diagnose the illness and did not give him antibiotics for more than four hours.
He was seen by Dr Kwong-Tou Yip and consultant paediatrician Dr Ezzat Afifi, who both gave him paracetomal.
The inquest heard both Dr Yip and Dr Afifi had “failed in their duty of care” for Thomas.
After the hearing at Cardiff Coroner’s Court, Cwm Taf University Health Board – which runs the hospital – said it accepted it had failed the teenager.
Chief executive Allison Williams said: “I would like to extend my sincere apologies to the parents of Thomas George Smith for the loss of their son. This is an extremely sad case and we deeply regret there were failings in the care Thomas received at Prince Charles Hospital.
“As noted during the inquest, the Health Board undertook an investigation which identified lessons learned and recommendations to ensure this will never happen again. A number of changes have already been made to address the failings identified.
“Following the conclusion of the inquest, the Health Board will now consider the coroner’s findings and continue to implement the changes required to address any failings in service.”
This article is courtesy of the Birmingham Mail.
Thomas Smith, from Hednesford, near Cannock, was nicknamed Ronnie by friends who compared his soccer skills to those of Cristiano Ronaldo.
But he fell ill with meningitis during a family holiday to Wales – and died on May 29 last year after being given paracetemol instead of antibiotics.
A coroner yesterday condemned Prince Charles Hospital in Merthyr Tydfil over the error as the teenager’s inquest ended.
Christopher Woolley said: “The failure to administer antibiotics amounts to a gross failure of care.
“Antibiotics should have been given without delay. Where meningitis is suspected it’s essential antibiotics are given immediately. The need for basic medical attention in this form was obvious. The risk of giving unnecessary medication was outweighed by the risk of Thomas having bacterial meningitis.”
Mr Woolley said he was also concerned about “further deaths” at Prince Charles Hospital and ordered a report.
But he said it was not a case of “neglect” and, even if Thomas had been given antibiotics, he would probably have still died.
Mr Woolley recorded a conclusion of death by natural causes.
The inquest earlier heard Thomas complained of six tell-tale signs of meningitis, including a headache and a stiff neck.
But doctors failed to diagnose the illness and did not give him antibiotics for more than four hours.
He was seen by Dr Kwong-Tou Yip and consultant paediatrician Dr Ezzat Afifi, who both gave him paracetomal.
The inquest heard both Dr Yip and Dr Afifi had “failed in their duty of care” for Thomas.
After the hearing at Cardiff Coroner’s Court, Cwm Taf University Health Board – which runs the hospital – said it accepted it had failed the teenager.
Chief executive Allison Williams said: “I would like to extend my sincere apologies to the parents of Thomas George Smith for the loss of their son. This is an extremely sad case and we deeply regret there were failings in the care Thomas received at Prince Charles Hospital.
“As noted during the inquest, the Health Board undertook an investigation which identified lessons learned and recommendations to ensure this will never happen again. A number of changes have already been made to address the failings identified.
“Following the conclusion of the inquest, the Health Board will now consider the coroner’s findings and continue to implement the changes required to address any failings in service.”
This article is courtesy of the Birmingham Mail.
Monday, 7 July 2014
Reducing medical mistakes
All the talk around patient safety is finally showing signs of translating into action as three different initiatives came together in the same week. On 24 June, Jeremy Hunt formally launched the ‘Sign up to Safety’ initiative, announced in March (blogs passim) which is a voluntary scheme designed to reduce medical mistakes by a third. At the same time, NHS Choices launched its new microsite wherein a range of data relating to patient safety has been published; and a review into the reporting culture of the NHS, led by Sir Robert Francis QC, was announced. Since the Mid-Staffordshire scandal, patient safety has been top of the political agenda with promises to reform the system coming thick and fast; at last these pledges now seem to be bearing fruit.
1. Sign up to Safety
This campaign is being led by Sir David Dalton, Chief Executive of Salford Royal Hospital and, so far, 12 NHS Trusts have signed up, developing plans to show how they will reduce ‘avoidable’ harm such as infections caused by lack of cleanliness, medication errors and blood clots. In other words, by looking after the small stuff, the big stuff has a better chance of looking after itself. This may seem like common sense but, as shown by the scandals following in the wake of Mid-Staffs, some hospitals have had to be reminded what they’re actually there to do and the proper environment in which to do it. So many medical negligence and NHS compensation cases that I see stem from a relatively minor cause or event which, had it been picked up and addressed early on, should not have caused the sort of harm that would lead to a claim. The fact that each ‘Sign up to Safety’ plan has to be reviewed and signed off by the NHS Litigation Authority - which then helps to finance the implementation of the plan - says it all.
2. Patient safety data
In the quest for openness, the NHS Choices microsite publishes a range of data enabling members of the public to assess their local hospital against seven criteria: CQC standards; ‘open and honest’ patient safety reporting; safe staffing levels; infection control and cleanliness; assessment for risk of blood clots; responding to patient safety alerts; and, finally, whether staff would recommend their hospital to friends and family. Of course there is the small issue of data interpretation and missing data which skews the results for some hospitals but, overall, this must be a worthwhile project. The latest set of data to be added is that of actual staffing levels - down to ward level - along with planned staffing levels. Naturally this data does need to be viewed with a degree of caution while it beds in – for instance a fifth of NHS acute trusts are rated ‘poor’ for reporting on patient safety. Taken at face value, this sets alarms ringing but is it that patient welfare is seriously compromised in this number of hospitals or is it that they are behind the curve in data collection, management and interpretation? Publishing the data will be an excellent incentive for hospitals to get their acts together.
3. The latest Francis Review
Sir Robert Francis QC, who led the inquiry into the Stafford Hospital scandal, will be heading up in independent review: ‘An Independent Review into creating an open and honest reporting culture in the NHS’. His objective is to ensure that staff faced with a serious breach of patient safety do not feel prevented in any way from reporting their concerns or to feel that taking such action will compromise their employment.
4. Conclusion
Some hospitals have already discovered the benefits of gathering and interpreting data to help them improve on services delivered. University Hospitals Trust Birmingham has been using data to drive patient care for some time, helping to uncover trends and promoting best practice across disciplines. Hospitals are large, complex organisms and the level of specialisation means that departments can operate different sets of standards under the same roof. As I’ve said in the past, by being upfront, open and honest about shortcomings and medical mistakes, hospitals can avoid negligence claims being lodged and lay the foundations for future best practice.
This article is courtesy of Jeanette Whyman, a Medical Negligence Claims Solicitor with Wright Hassall; she has successfully secured NHS Compensation for many victims of medical negligence.
1. Sign up to Safety
This campaign is being led by Sir David Dalton, Chief Executive of Salford Royal Hospital and, so far, 12 NHS Trusts have signed up, developing plans to show how they will reduce ‘avoidable’ harm such as infections caused by lack of cleanliness, medication errors and blood clots. In other words, by looking after the small stuff, the big stuff has a better chance of looking after itself. This may seem like common sense but, as shown by the scandals following in the wake of Mid-Staffs, some hospitals have had to be reminded what they’re actually there to do and the proper environment in which to do it. So many medical negligence and NHS compensation cases that I see stem from a relatively minor cause or event which, had it been picked up and addressed early on, should not have caused the sort of harm that would lead to a claim. The fact that each ‘Sign up to Safety’ plan has to be reviewed and signed off by the NHS Litigation Authority - which then helps to finance the implementation of the plan - says it all.
2. Patient safety data
In the quest for openness, the NHS Choices microsite publishes a range of data enabling members of the public to assess their local hospital against seven criteria: CQC standards; ‘open and honest’ patient safety reporting; safe staffing levels; infection control and cleanliness; assessment for risk of blood clots; responding to patient safety alerts; and, finally, whether staff would recommend their hospital to friends and family. Of course there is the small issue of data interpretation and missing data which skews the results for some hospitals but, overall, this must be a worthwhile project. The latest set of data to be added is that of actual staffing levels - down to ward level - along with planned staffing levels. Naturally this data does need to be viewed with a degree of caution while it beds in – for instance a fifth of NHS acute trusts are rated ‘poor’ for reporting on patient safety. Taken at face value, this sets alarms ringing but is it that patient welfare is seriously compromised in this number of hospitals or is it that they are behind the curve in data collection, management and interpretation? Publishing the data will be an excellent incentive for hospitals to get their acts together.
3. The latest Francis Review
Sir Robert Francis QC, who led the inquiry into the Stafford Hospital scandal, will be heading up in independent review: ‘An Independent Review into creating an open and honest reporting culture in the NHS’. His objective is to ensure that staff faced with a serious breach of patient safety do not feel prevented in any way from reporting their concerns or to feel that taking such action will compromise their employment.
4. Conclusion
Some hospitals have already discovered the benefits of gathering and interpreting data to help them improve on services delivered. University Hospitals Trust Birmingham has been using data to drive patient care for some time, helping to uncover trends and promoting best practice across disciplines. Hospitals are large, complex organisms and the level of specialisation means that departments can operate different sets of standards under the same roof. As I’ve said in the past, by being upfront, open and honest about shortcomings and medical mistakes, hospitals can avoid negligence claims being lodged and lay the foundations for future best practice.
This article is courtesy of Jeanette Whyman, a Medical Negligence Claims Solicitor with Wright Hassall; she has successfully secured NHS Compensation for many victims of medical negligence.
Friday, 4 July 2014
NHS Scotland's blunder payouts reach £186m as country's top doctor brands care crisis in hospitals a 'car crash'
The “disgraceful” total has increased sharply in the last two years, from £25.3million in 2011-12 to £35.5million in 2013-14.
Patients’ groups have slammed NHS Scotland for spending more than £186million on compensation claims and legal settlements in the last five years.
The “disgraceful” total has increased sharply in the last two years, from £25.3million in 2011-12 to £35.5million in 2013-14.
Claims from employees have also sky-rocketed – from £1.1million in 2009-10 to £3.4million last year.
This news comes as Scotland’s top doctor branded our crisis-hit NHS a “car crash” and blamed politicians for the disaster.
Dr Brian Keighley, head of the BMA in Scotland, warned that the future of the health service hangs in the balance because of unacceptable queues at A&E and delays in vital cancer treatments.
Dr Jean Turner, executive director of Scotland Patients Association, echoed his concerns and described the sharp rise in compensation payouts as “extremely worrying”.
She said: “These figures are disgraceful. It seems there are more and more people coming forward with complaints about the level of care they receive.
“It is a huge amount of money that could be better spent on drugs, treatment and patient care.
“There are problems with staffing and everyone working is under extreme pressure. This means they are much more liable to make mistakes.”
Scottish Labour’s health spokesman Neil Findlay accused Health Secretary Alex Neil of “jumping from one crisis to the next”.
He said: “Our NHS staff do a terrific job but we know there is huge concern about resources and staffing.
“If that is contributing to our negligence costs, then Alex Neil has to understand he has a problem. “
The Scottish Government said: “Scotland is recognised as having some of the safest hospitals in the world.
“However, it is absolutely essential that when clinical negligence claims do arise, NHS boards learn from these cases and put steps in place to ensure that there is no repeat in future.”
This article is courtesy of the Daily Record.
Patients’ groups have slammed NHS Scotland for spending more than £186million on compensation claims and legal settlements in the last five years.
The “disgraceful” total has increased sharply in the last two years, from £25.3million in 2011-12 to £35.5million in 2013-14.
Claims from employees have also sky-rocketed – from £1.1million in 2009-10 to £3.4million last year.
This news comes as Scotland’s top doctor branded our crisis-hit NHS a “car crash” and blamed politicians for the disaster.
Dr Brian Keighley, head of the BMA in Scotland, warned that the future of the health service hangs in the balance because of unacceptable queues at A&E and delays in vital cancer treatments.
Dr Jean Turner, executive director of Scotland Patients Association, echoed his concerns and described the sharp rise in compensation payouts as “extremely worrying”.
She said: “These figures are disgraceful. It seems there are more and more people coming forward with complaints about the level of care they receive.
“It is a huge amount of money that could be better spent on drugs, treatment and patient care.
“There are problems with staffing and everyone working is under extreme pressure. This means they are much more liable to make mistakes.”
Scottish Labour’s health spokesman Neil Findlay accused Health Secretary Alex Neil of “jumping from one crisis to the next”.
He said: “Our NHS staff do a terrific job but we know there is huge concern about resources and staffing.
“If that is contributing to our negligence costs, then Alex Neil has to understand he has a problem. “
The Scottish Government said: “Scotland is recognised as having some of the safest hospitals in the world.
“However, it is absolutely essential that when clinical negligence claims do arise, NHS boards learn from these cases and put steps in place to ensure that there is no repeat in future.”
This article is courtesy of the Daily Record.
Wednesday, 2 July 2014
GPs who fail to spot cancer could be named
GPs with a poor record in spotting signs of cancer could be publicly named under new government plans.
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt wants to expose doctors whose failure to spot cancer may delay sending patients for potentially life-saving scans.
Labour called the idea "desperate" and accused Mr Hunt of attacking doctors.
The Royal College of GPs said it would be a "crude" system and one that could lead to GPs sending people to specialists indiscriminately.
It warned this could result in flooding hospitals with healthy people.
The move is part of the health secretary's plans to make the NHS more transparent.
Ranking GP surgeries on how quickly they spot cases of cancer and refer patients for treatment is among proposals being considered.
The information could eventually be published on the NHS website.
This follows a survey for the NHS last year, which suggested that more than a quarter of people eventually diagnosed with cancer had seen their GP at least three times before being sent to a specialist.
"We need to do much better," the health secretary told the Mail on Sunday.
"Cancer diagnosis levels around the country vary significantly and we must do much more to improve both the level of diagnosis and to bring those GP practices with poor referral rates up to the standards of the best."
Doctors found to be missing too many cases of cancer or with patients who are forced to make repeated visits before being referred for tests would be marked with a red flag.
A patient's story
Susan has a sister with terminal cancer.
She told the BBC: "My sister was first told she had a prolapsed womb, then piles. "By the time she was seen by an oncologist, eight months had elapsed.
"She has terminal squamous cell anal cancer - completely curable if caught early enough. "She is 62, and now has a few months to live. "One of the classic mistakes the GP made was to diagnose anal bleeding as piles. It wasn't - it was the tumour.
"This doctor has condemned my sister to a year, so far, of terrible suffering and a death which is too dreadful to contemplate, when she could have been completely cured.
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt wants to expose doctors whose failure to spot cancer may delay sending patients for potentially life-saving scans.
Labour called the idea "desperate" and accused Mr Hunt of attacking doctors.
The Royal College of GPs said it would be a "crude" system and one that could lead to GPs sending people to specialists indiscriminately.
It warned this could result in flooding hospitals with healthy people.
The move is part of the health secretary's plans to make the NHS more transparent.
Ranking GP surgeries on how quickly they spot cases of cancer and refer patients for treatment is among proposals being considered.
The information could eventually be published on the NHS website.
This follows a survey for the NHS last year, which suggested that more than a quarter of people eventually diagnosed with cancer had seen their GP at least three times before being sent to a specialist.
"We need to do much better," the health secretary told the Mail on Sunday.
"Cancer diagnosis levels around the country vary significantly and we must do much more to improve both the level of diagnosis and to bring those GP practices with poor referral rates up to the standards of the best."
Doctors found to be missing too many cases of cancer or with patients who are forced to make repeated visits before being referred for tests would be marked with a red flag.
A patient's story
Susan has a sister with terminal cancer.
She told the BBC: "My sister was first told she had a prolapsed womb, then piles. "By the time she was seen by an oncologist, eight months had elapsed.
"She has terminal squamous cell anal cancer - completely curable if caught early enough. "She is 62, and now has a few months to live. "One of the classic mistakes the GP made was to diagnose anal bleeding as piles. It wasn't - it was the tumour.
"This doctor has condemned my sister to a year, so far, of terrible suffering and a death which is too dreadful to contemplate, when she could have been completely cured.
"Prognosis is something like 96% complete cure if treated early." Susan believes her sister's GP should be "named and shamed" but thinks each case should be considered on an individual basis.
"As a retired teacher, I know what being continually maligned, judged, overlooked and overloaded can do to morale and performance," she added.
Those found with quick referral times for patients would be given a green rating.
Shadow health minister Jamie Reed said the government would not take responsibility for problems it had created in the NHS.
"David Cameron wasted billions on a re-organisation nobody wanted and left cancer patients waiting longer for tests and treatment. He should be ashamed of his own record - not attacking doctors," he said.
"This government has thrown away progress made on cancer care. It is proof of why the Tories can't be trusted with the NHS."
'Clog up clinics'
Dr Chaand Nagpaul, chair of the British Medical Association general practitioners committee, said to name and shame doctors would not help patients.
He said it was important to understand why there were delays in making referrals and to raise public awareness about the signs and symptoms of cancer.
"We need to look at the whole system and if you simply name and shame GPs, the tendency would be for us to refer everyone," he told the BBC.
"And that can be a disadvantage because if we clog up hospital outpatient clinics, we'll get patients who need to see their specialist actually having to wait longer."
Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston, a former GP who chairs the Commons health select committee, said the government needed to be careful not to wrongly label people as "poor doctors".
She too warned there was a danger of automatically referring everyone to a specialist and creating "impossibly long waiting lists", which could harm those needing to be seen urgently.
Rising demand
Dr Wollaston added that she could not see how GPs could maintain current levels of service amid rising demand without a funding injection.
"The NHS budget has been protected in line with background inflation but that does not keep pace with inflation in health costs from rising demand and demographic changes," she said.
"I don't want to see any reduction in services. I would like to see further improvements and that will require an increase in funding."
Dr Wollaston joined Conservative former health secretary Stephen Dorrell and Lib Dem former health minister Paul Burstow in calling for increased funding for the NHS.
Mr Burstow warned that the NHS was in danger of collapse within five years without extra spending. He said the health service needed an extra £15bn over that period in order to function properly.
Mr Dorrell said he would be ashamed if the government failed to increase NHS funding at a time when the economy was growing.
"I am in favour of the government not denying what 5,000 years of history tells us is true, which is that every time a society gets richer it spends a rising share of its income on looking after the sick and the vulnerable," he told The Observer.
Those found with quick referral times for patients would be given a green rating.
Shadow health minister Jamie Reed said the government would not take responsibility for problems it had created in the NHS.
"David Cameron wasted billions on a re-organisation nobody wanted and left cancer patients waiting longer for tests and treatment. He should be ashamed of his own record - not attacking doctors," he said.
"This government has thrown away progress made on cancer care. It is proof of why the Tories can't be trusted with the NHS."
'Clog up clinics'
Dr Chaand Nagpaul, chair of the British Medical Association general practitioners committee, said to name and shame doctors would not help patients.
He said it was important to understand why there were delays in making referrals and to raise public awareness about the signs and symptoms of cancer.
"We need to look at the whole system and if you simply name and shame GPs, the tendency would be for us to refer everyone," he told the BBC.
"And that can be a disadvantage because if we clog up hospital outpatient clinics, we'll get patients who need to see their specialist actually having to wait longer."
Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston, a former GP who chairs the Commons health select committee, said the government needed to be careful not to wrongly label people as "poor doctors".
She too warned there was a danger of automatically referring everyone to a specialist and creating "impossibly long waiting lists", which could harm those needing to be seen urgently.
Rising demand
Dr Wollaston added that she could not see how GPs could maintain current levels of service amid rising demand without a funding injection.
"The NHS budget has been protected in line with background inflation but that does not keep pace with inflation in health costs from rising demand and demographic changes," she said.
"I don't want to see any reduction in services. I would like to see further improvements and that will require an increase in funding."
Dr Wollaston joined Conservative former health secretary Stephen Dorrell and Lib Dem former health minister Paul Burstow in calling for increased funding for the NHS.
Mr Burstow warned that the NHS was in danger of collapse within five years without extra spending. He said the health service needed an extra £15bn over that period in order to function properly.
Mr Dorrell said he would be ashamed if the government failed to increase NHS funding at a time when the economy was growing.
"I am in favour of the government not denying what 5,000 years of history tells us is true, which is that every time a society gets richer it spends a rising share of its income on looking after the sick and the vulnerable," he told The Observer.
Monday, 30 June 2014
Brain injured girl, 11, wins right to compensation payout
Millie Bowers will never lead a fully independent life due to brain injuries blamed on mistakes by medics at Guildford's Royal Surrey County Hospital.
An 11-year-old girl, stricken by "catastrophic" brain injuries blamed on mistakes by medics at the Royal Surrey County Hospital, has won the right to a compensation pay-out in London's High Court.
Millie Bowers cannot walk unaided and will never lead a fully independent life due to a brain fever that developed in the months after her birth in September 2002.
Although a ‘sparky and animated’ youngster, she has lifelong learning difficulties, Mrs Justice Carr told the court on Wednesday June 25.
Millie was born prematurely while her parents were on holiday in Turkey in autumn 2002, and she developed a meningitis-like infection in the weeks after her delivery.
The family lived in Surrey at the time, and she was rushed to the Royal Surrey when just 25 days old, her QC, James Badenoch, told the court, and seemed to be making ‘satisfactory’ progress after being given antibiotics.
However, the barrister claimed medical staff at the hospital negligently failed to refer her for specialist neurological treatment to deal with a dangerous build-up of fluid within her brain.
By the time she was referred to London’s Kings College Hospital for surgery in December 2002 it was too late to save her from brain damage, it was claimed.
Millie – who is suing through her father Andrew Bowers – claimed damages from the Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, which admitted negligence.
Mrs Justice Carr said the trust had made an ‘early admission of breach of duty’ in failing to refer Millie to a specialist unit by late November 2002.
She said the issue of precisely what caused Millie's permanent disabilities remained ‘very much in issue,’ since lawyers for the NHS Trust insisted that her injuries were all but irreversible by late November.
Mr Badenoch acknowledged that, had the case gone to trial, Millie would have faced substantial ‘litigation risks’.
However, he described the process of referring Millie to specialists as ‘frankly shambolic’.
Michael De Navarro QC, for the trust, said the referral delay may have been due to fault on the part of other hospitals.
Mr Badenoch told the judge both sides had finally been able to hammer out a settlement which eliminated the need for a contested trial from which Millie could have come away with nothing.
The trust agreed to compensate the youngster on the basis of 75% of the full value of her claim.
Approving the deal, Mrs Justice Carr paid tribute to Millie and her parents’ ‘selfless devotion’ over the years.
The amount of Millie’s compensation will be assessed at a later date. Even after a 25% deduction, her award is likely to run well into seven figures in order to pay the lifetime of care and assistance she will need.
“The assessment of damages can hopefully be completed as soon as possible to bring some finality to this case,” said Justice Carr.
This article is courtesy of Get Surrey.
An 11-year-old girl, stricken by "catastrophic" brain injuries blamed on mistakes by medics at the Royal Surrey County Hospital, has won the right to a compensation pay-out in London's High Court.
Millie Bowers cannot walk unaided and will never lead a fully independent life due to a brain fever that developed in the months after her birth in September 2002.
Although a ‘sparky and animated’ youngster, she has lifelong learning difficulties, Mrs Justice Carr told the court on Wednesday June 25.
Millie was born prematurely while her parents were on holiday in Turkey in autumn 2002, and she developed a meningitis-like infection in the weeks after her delivery.
The family lived in Surrey at the time, and she was rushed to the Royal Surrey when just 25 days old, her QC, James Badenoch, told the court, and seemed to be making ‘satisfactory’ progress after being given antibiotics.
However, the barrister claimed medical staff at the hospital negligently failed to refer her for specialist neurological treatment to deal with a dangerous build-up of fluid within her brain.
By the time she was referred to London’s Kings College Hospital for surgery in December 2002 it was too late to save her from brain damage, it was claimed.
Millie – who is suing through her father Andrew Bowers – claimed damages from the Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, which admitted negligence.
Mrs Justice Carr said the trust had made an ‘early admission of breach of duty’ in failing to refer Millie to a specialist unit by late November 2002.
She said the issue of precisely what caused Millie's permanent disabilities remained ‘very much in issue,’ since lawyers for the NHS Trust insisted that her injuries were all but irreversible by late November.
Mr Badenoch acknowledged that, had the case gone to trial, Millie would have faced substantial ‘litigation risks’.
However, he described the process of referring Millie to specialists as ‘frankly shambolic’.
Michael De Navarro QC, for the trust, said the referral delay may have been due to fault on the part of other hospitals.
Mr Badenoch told the judge both sides had finally been able to hammer out a settlement which eliminated the need for a contested trial from which Millie could have come away with nothing.
The trust agreed to compensate the youngster on the basis of 75% of the full value of her claim.
Approving the deal, Mrs Justice Carr paid tribute to Millie and her parents’ ‘selfless devotion’ over the years.
The amount of Millie’s compensation will be assessed at a later date. Even after a 25% deduction, her award is likely to run well into seven figures in order to pay the lifetime of care and assistance she will need.
“The assessment of damages can hopefully be completed as soon as possible to bring some finality to this case,” said Justice Carr.
This article is courtesy of Get Surrey.
Wednesday, 18 June 2014
Health and social care integration – can it be done?
When the new Chief Executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens, made his inaugural speech in May to the NHS Confederation in Liverpool, setting out what he saw as the priorities for a reformed NHS, concerns about the future affordability of the NHS in its current guise continued to pepper the front pages. The most pressing worry is the impact of an aging population on health and social care resources – thrown into stark relief by news that the death of an elderly woman in a South Wales, apparently from unexplained injuries sustained while in hospital, is now the subject of a police investigation. A solution to the difficulty of coordinating medical and social care provided by two different entities on different charging bases is the creation of the Better Care Fund, due to be launched in 2015. The £3.8bn fund, jointly raised by the NHS and the Local Government Association (but with no additional funding from central government), is supposed to help support closer collaboration in local areas between the NHS and local authorities.
The impact of age
The average cost of providing healthcare for the retired population is £5,200 per household compared with £2,800 per household for the working population (source: ONS) and although life expectancy has increased, a commensurate improvement in health has not. According to Simon Stevens, 46% of hospital admissions are over retirement age, many of whom remain in hospital longer than needed due to a paucity of care home beds in the locality or because their own homes have not been adapted to enable to them to cope by themselves. Tales of poor care and neglect of the elderly have been reverberating around the NHS for some time now and, although, inexcusable on any level, it may well be a symptom of a system unable to cope with these demands. Hence the call for a reorganisation of the NHS so that primary, secondary and community care teams cooperate more effectively and so that a flexible approach can be developed to meet local needs.
The Better Care Fund
Originally conceived as a plan to ensure better alignment between the care provided by the NHS and that provided by social services, particularly in relation to older people, the project has got off to a rocky start. A recent Whitehall report has queried its viability by criticising its financial credibility, alleging that detailed plans for how savings are going to be made are in short supply. The original idea was that the £1.9bn contribution from the NHS would essentially pay for itself by the consequential savings made by freeing up hospital resources by moving elderly patients out of hospital either to care homes or to their own homes. However, it has been pointed out that much of the expenditure is fixed: salaries and equipment making up the bulk of costs.
A vision for a new improved NHS
Ann Clwyd has recently been called to give evidence into standards of care across Welsh hospitals in the light of her personal experience of the negligent care her husband received in hospital prior to his death, and her subsequent report into the NHS complaints system. In the course of compiling her report she received many letters from people who also had experience of the similar poor standards of care in Welsh hospitals. She believes that her experience of the “callous lack of care” afforded to her husband is not an isolated incident and that it reflects a wider malaise within the health system as whole. The improvement of the standard and delivery of care was the overarching theme in Simon Stevens’ speech; patient care and survivability were the key principles that should drive the changes. He spoke of making the NHS budget work harder by getting more bang for its buck; redesigning the core delivery of services to introduce more flexibility
In short
The Kings Fund health think tank has warned that the NHS is facing a financial crisis and considers plans like the Better Care Fund to be ill thought out and unhelpful on the basis that hospitals cannot afford to lose any of their funding. However, as NHS England’s chief executive has pointed out, raising standards of patient care is not just about money but also about attitude and culture. It is a question of highlighting areas of best practice and using it to transform those hospitals where standards need improving. All this will take time which means that medical negligence headlines will continue to grab people’s attention.
Jeanette Whyman is a solicitor who specialises in securing NHS compensation for people who have experienced medical negligence and poor treatment.
Monday, 16 June 2014
Maternity services under pressure
A case in which I advised the parents of a four-day old baby who died in 2012 after being deprived of oxygen has recently been in the news as the family has only just received a five-figure settlement and an apology from Warwick Hospital. An inquest, held in June 2013, heard how failings in Daniel’s care during labour had led to his death. These included three different midwives failing to read his mother’s antenatal notes which would have revealed her as a medium risk patient; one of the midwives having a history of making mistakes; and a failure by staff to monitor the foetal heart properly.
The testimony of Sarah Kunigiskis, mother of baby Daniel, makes harrowing reading. In addition to the grief of losing her baby was the refusal of the hospital to admit they were at fault while implying that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery. As she noted, the refusal of the hospital to acknowledge that a catastrophic error had occurred, made an awful situation far worse. One of the reasons Sarah was willing to speak out was to help put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made by encouraging others in
similar situations to challenge the experts if they feel things are not right.
NAO report into maternity services in England
The situation endured by the Kunigiskis family is not unfamiliar to medical negligence solicitors. Obstetrics is a particularly challenging area of medicine where there is, on the one hand, a desire not to medicalise a perfectly natural event but, on the other, a need to step in as soon as things start going wrong. A report released by the National Audit Office in November 2013 highlighted that some of the problems faced by maternity services in England were reflected in the fact that a third of the NHS litigation budget was absorbed by medical negligence cases relating to birth complications. In 2012 there were almost 700,000 live births, the highest rate for 40 years, putting considerable pressure on resources. There has also been a noticeable increase in the number of ‘high risk’ births including multiple births, women over 40 and women with obesity or pre-existing medical conditions. Although mortality rates have improved, the NAO report noted that there were ‘wide, unexplained variations in the performance of individual trusts in relation to complication rates and medical intervention rates, even after adjustment for maternal characteristics and clinical risk factors’.
Need to improve safety
The number of maternity-related medical negligence claims increased by 80% in the five years to 2012-13 resulting in a litigation bill for maternity claims alone amounting to £482m in 2012-13. This figure represents about a fifth of all spending on maternity services which is a sobering fact by anyone’s standards. The NAO report flagged a number of areas which might help to explain why medical negligence claims were so high: more than half the obstetric units in England did not have the number of consultants on site as recommended by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; and midwife staffing levels fell below that recommended by a national benchmark of 29.5 births per midwife. In order to achieve this ratio, another 2,300 midwives would need to be recruited although even this would be further complicated by the fact that a large number of midwives were reaching retirement age and a growing proportion of student midwives were failing to complete their courses.
More cooperation, better data
Although, sadly, the Kunigiskis case is, by no means, an isolated incident, and despite the upward pressure on maternity services generally across the country, most women do have positive experiences of giving birth in a NHS hospital. However, there is clearly scope for major improvement, not least in order to reduce the phenomenal amount being paid out in medical negligence claims. Among the NAO recommendations is a call for more and better data on maternity services in order to track trends, outcomes and experiences; and clinical commissioning groups should look at how services are delivered in their area and look to cooperate with neighbouring trusts to ensure all available resources are used efficiently. Last but not least, hospitals need to own up to mistakes at the outset and endeavour to give the families a full an explanation of what went wrong. It is the very least they can do and might even help to reduce the number of claims made against them.
This article is courtesy of Jeanette Whyman, a solicitor who specialises in securing NHS compensation for people who have experienced medical negligence and poor treatment.
The testimony of Sarah Kunigiskis, mother of baby Daniel, makes harrowing reading. In addition to the grief of losing her baby was the refusal of the hospital to admit they were at fault while implying that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery. As she noted, the refusal of the hospital to acknowledge that a catastrophic error had occurred, made an awful situation far worse. One of the reasons Sarah was willing to speak out was to help put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made by encouraging others in
similar situations to challenge the experts if they feel things are not right.
NAO report into maternity services in England
The situation endured by the Kunigiskis family is not unfamiliar to medical negligence solicitors. Obstetrics is a particularly challenging area of medicine where there is, on the one hand, a desire not to medicalise a perfectly natural event but, on the other, a need to step in as soon as things start going wrong. A report released by the National Audit Office in November 2013 highlighted that some of the problems faced by maternity services in England were reflected in the fact that a third of the NHS litigation budget was absorbed by medical negligence cases relating to birth complications. In 2012 there were almost 700,000 live births, the highest rate for 40 years, putting considerable pressure on resources. There has also been a noticeable increase in the number of ‘high risk’ births including multiple births, women over 40 and women with obesity or pre-existing medical conditions. Although mortality rates have improved, the NAO report noted that there were ‘wide, unexplained variations in the performance of individual trusts in relation to complication rates and medical intervention rates, even after adjustment for maternal characteristics and clinical risk factors’.
Need to improve safety
The number of maternity-related medical negligence claims increased by 80% in the five years to 2012-13 resulting in a litigation bill for maternity claims alone amounting to £482m in 2012-13. This figure represents about a fifth of all spending on maternity services which is a sobering fact by anyone’s standards. The NAO report flagged a number of areas which might help to explain why medical negligence claims were so high: more than half the obstetric units in England did not have the number of consultants on site as recommended by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; and midwife staffing levels fell below that recommended by a national benchmark of 29.5 births per midwife. In order to achieve this ratio, another 2,300 midwives would need to be recruited although even this would be further complicated by the fact that a large number of midwives were reaching retirement age and a growing proportion of student midwives were failing to complete their courses.
More cooperation, better data
Although, sadly, the Kunigiskis case is, by no means, an isolated incident, and despite the upward pressure on maternity services generally across the country, most women do have positive experiences of giving birth in a NHS hospital. However, there is clearly scope for major improvement, not least in order to reduce the phenomenal amount being paid out in medical negligence claims. Among the NAO recommendations is a call for more and better data on maternity services in order to track trends, outcomes and experiences; and clinical commissioning groups should look at how services are delivered in their area and look to cooperate with neighbouring trusts to ensure all available resources are used efficiently. Last but not least, hospitals need to own up to mistakes at the outset and endeavour to give the families a full an explanation of what went wrong. It is the very least they can do and might even help to reduce the number of claims made against them.
This article is courtesy of Jeanette Whyman, a solicitor who specialises in securing NHS compensation for people who have experienced medical negligence and poor treatment.
Thursday, 12 June 2014
The family of a baby who died after hospital failings has won a five-figure pay-out
Daniel Kunigiskis died aged just four days after errors made at Warwick Hospital during the baby’s delivery in October 2012.
An inquest in June 2013 heard how Daniel suffered a lack of oxygen at birth, resulting in a severe brain injury. Following legal action, the family has now received a five-figure settlement and apology.
Speaking out for the first time about the case, mum Sarah, who lives in Warwick with her husband Tyron, said: “The death of Daniel has been so traumatic and that pain has been increased by the hospital taking such a long time to admit they were in the wrong.
“The hospital initially tried to imply that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery and would not admit they were at fault. During the labour I had a feeling things were going wrong, because I had given birth before, and I was saying ‘he’s not coming out, he’s not coming out’ and they were saying ‘oh no you are fine’.”
The inquest heard how three different midwives failed to read Sarah’s antenatal notes which would have revealed her as a medium risk patient, one of the midwives having a history of making mistakes and a failure by staff to monitor the foetal heartbeat properly.
Daniel was transferred from Warwick Hospital to Coventry’s University Hospital but sadly died on October 13. A consultant obstetrician indicated that if he had been aware of problems during Daniel’s birth he could have ensured delivery 45 minutes earlier – which would have meant Daniel would have survived.
“You put your faith in them getting it right and then they make these kind of catastrophic mistakes,” added Sarah.
“It’s then made worse when they won’t admit to it.
“By speaking out now about what happened to Daniel, I hope it can help to put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made. I hope it also raises awareness to individual patients to feel more confident in following their instincts in questioning the process when they believe that things are not right.
“It’s difficult to feel comfortable in making that challenge but I hope my case gives people the strength and courage to challenge those decisions.”
Sarah’s feelings of anger bubbled to the surface recently when her mum was admitted to the ward opposite the maternity ward at Warwick Hospital and was nervous about the care she would receive.
“Thankfully she received fantastic care and even the aftercare was excellent,” added Sarah.
Jeanette Whyman, Sarah’s solicitor and part of Leamington solicitors Wright Hassall’s clinical negligence team, said: “One of the most alarming and frustrating aspects of Sarah’s case was the length of time it took the hospital to admit their mistakes.
“The hospital refused to admit for a long time that the delay in delivery had resulted ultimately in Daniel’s death.
“They admitted there were issues with the birth but they didn’t say that had caused the terrible injuries Daniel suffered.
“There was a total refusal to admit to their negligence.’’
Helen Lancaster, director of nursing said: “At the inquest the Trust accepted that mistakes were made during the delivery of Daniel Kunigiskis, which we sincerely regret. I apologised to the family at the inquest. On behalf of the Trust I would like to apologise again and offer my condolences to Daniel’s family.”
An inquest in June 2013 heard how Daniel suffered a lack of oxygen at birth, resulting in a severe brain injury. Following legal action, the family has now received a five-figure settlement and apology.
Speaking out for the first time about the case, mum Sarah, who lives in Warwick with her husband Tyron, said: “The death of Daniel has been so traumatic and that pain has been increased by the hospital taking such a long time to admit they were in the wrong.
“The hospital initially tried to imply that there was something wrong with the baby before delivery and would not admit they were at fault. During the labour I had a feeling things were going wrong, because I had given birth before, and I was saying ‘he’s not coming out, he’s not coming out’ and they were saying ‘oh no you are fine’.”
The inquest heard how three different midwives failed to read Sarah’s antenatal notes which would have revealed her as a medium risk patient, one of the midwives having a history of making mistakes and a failure by staff to monitor the foetal heartbeat properly.
Daniel was transferred from Warwick Hospital to Coventry’s University Hospital but sadly died on October 13. A consultant obstetrician indicated that if he had been aware of problems during Daniel’s birth he could have ensured delivery 45 minutes earlier – which would have meant Daniel would have survived.
“You put your faith in them getting it right and then they make these kind of catastrophic mistakes,” added Sarah.
“It’s then made worse when they won’t admit to it.
“By speaking out now about what happened to Daniel, I hope it can help to put pressure on hospitals and NHS Trusts to be more accountable for their actions when mistakes are made. I hope it also raises awareness to individual patients to feel more confident in following their instincts in questioning the process when they believe that things are not right.
“It’s difficult to feel comfortable in making that challenge but I hope my case gives people the strength and courage to challenge those decisions.”
Sarah’s feelings of anger bubbled to the surface recently when her mum was admitted to the ward opposite the maternity ward at Warwick Hospital and was nervous about the care she would receive.
“Thankfully she received fantastic care and even the aftercare was excellent,” added Sarah.
Jeanette Whyman, Sarah’s solicitor and part of Leamington solicitors Wright Hassall’s clinical negligence team, said: “One of the most alarming and frustrating aspects of Sarah’s case was the length of time it took the hospital to admit their mistakes.
“The hospital refused to admit for a long time that the delay in delivery had resulted ultimately in Daniel’s death.
“They admitted there were issues with the birth but they didn’t say that had caused the terrible injuries Daniel suffered.
“There was a total refusal to admit to their negligence.’’
Helen Lancaster, director of nursing said: “At the inquest the Trust accepted that mistakes were made during the delivery of Daniel Kunigiskis, which we sincerely regret. I apologised to the family at the inquest. On behalf of the Trust I would like to apologise again and offer my condolences to Daniel’s family.”
Monday, 9 June 2014
West Midlands Ambulance Service fined £2.6 million over missed targets
The NHS in North Staffordshire has pocketed nearly £100,000 of a fine imposed for ambulance delays in other parts of the West Midlands.
The cash is part of £2.6million penalty on the region’s ambulance trust for failing to get to life-threatening calls quickly enough.
Over the whole of the West Midlands it missed a Government directive to reach 75 percent of 999s within eight minutes over the past year.
And even though it hit the target in North Staffordshire, £94,000 still comes to the area.
That is in recognition that ambulances could have been taken out of the county to cope with the hold-ups which built up in Birmingham districts.
Some will be paid back to improve ambulance response times with the rest available to spend on patient care by North Staffordshire’s two clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) which control NHS budgets.
Union leaders branded it “a farce” that money was being taken from a service already struggling to meet demand.
Latest figures show that despite the failings elsewhere, ambulances reached 76.5 percent of North Staffordshire emergencies within eight minutes last month to bring the average for the year to 81.1 percent.
CCGs’ finance director Tony Matthews said: “The delays are linked to the longer periods it was taking for ambulances to drop patients off at Birmingham hospitals and get back on the road again.
“In fact, at our own University Hospital of North Staffordshire, these turnaround times are among the shortest in the country.”
The service will lose £800,000 of the total fine because the remaining £1.8million will be reinvested to improve ambulance response times.
Leaders at West Midlands Ambulance Service(WMAS) say it has experienced unprecedented and unpredictable demand.
A spokesman said: “We were fined for failing to reach the Red 2 performance standard by just over one percent. To put this into perspective, we missed the target by, on average, only 12 seconds.
“There was no impact on patients from the levying of the fine as the trust board agreed to fund the £800,000 from reserves so that patient care was protected.
“We are currently exceeding all performance standards for 2014-15.”
The fine was technically imposed by Sandwell CCG which leads ambulance commissioning on behalf of all 17 groups in the West Midlands.
Ray Salmon, regional organiser for Unison ambulance union, said: “This is a farce. You cannot have 17 decisions made locally about an ambulance service which operates across the whole region.”
Ian Syme, co-ordinator of NHS campaigning group North Staffordshire Healthwatch, said: “Even though the problems appear to have been in Birmingham, ambulances may have been sent from Staffordshire to cover and that could have had a knock-on effect for UHNS.”
This article is courtesy from Stoke Sentinel.
The cash is part of £2.6million penalty on the region’s ambulance trust for failing to get to life-threatening calls quickly enough.
Over the whole of the West Midlands it missed a Government directive to reach 75 percent of 999s within eight minutes over the past year.
And even though it hit the target in North Staffordshire, £94,000 still comes to the area.
That is in recognition that ambulances could have been taken out of the county to cope with the hold-ups which built up in Birmingham districts.
Some will be paid back to improve ambulance response times with the rest available to spend on patient care by North Staffordshire’s two clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) which control NHS budgets.
Union leaders branded it “a farce” that money was being taken from a service already struggling to meet demand.
Latest figures show that despite the failings elsewhere, ambulances reached 76.5 percent of North Staffordshire emergencies within eight minutes last month to bring the average for the year to 81.1 percent.
CCGs’ finance director Tony Matthews said: “The delays are linked to the longer periods it was taking for ambulances to drop patients off at Birmingham hospitals and get back on the road again.
“In fact, at our own University Hospital of North Staffordshire, these turnaround times are among the shortest in the country.”
The service will lose £800,000 of the total fine because the remaining £1.8million will be reinvested to improve ambulance response times.
Leaders at West Midlands Ambulance Service(WMAS) say it has experienced unprecedented and unpredictable demand.
A spokesman said: “We were fined for failing to reach the Red 2 performance standard by just over one percent. To put this into perspective, we missed the target by, on average, only 12 seconds.
“There was no impact on patients from the levying of the fine as the trust board agreed to fund the £800,000 from reserves so that patient care was protected.
“We are currently exceeding all performance standards for 2014-15.”
The fine was technically imposed by Sandwell CCG which leads ambulance commissioning on behalf of all 17 groups in the West Midlands.
Ray Salmon, regional organiser for Unison ambulance union, said: “This is a farce. You cannot have 17 decisions made locally about an ambulance service which operates across the whole region.”
Ian Syme, co-ordinator of NHS campaigning group North Staffordshire Healthwatch, said: “Even though the problems appear to have been in Birmingham, ambulances may have been sent from Staffordshire to cover and that could have had a knock-on effect for UHNS.”
This article is courtesy from Stoke Sentinel.
Friday, 6 June 2014
New penalty cap could reduce total NHS bill
The study by software company Checklist calculated the potential size of this year’s fines by applying the new system of penalties and caps to trusts’ performance data for last year.
This showed that they would face less than £87m of fines in 2014-15 if the new rules and cap were applied. A similar study by Checklist in 2013 put the total penalties bill at £227m.
Checklist examined trust performance against targets for referral-to-treatment waits, 12-hour trolley waits, emergency admissions and cancelled operations, among others.
Trusts are likely to come under increasing pressure to hit performance targets in 2014-15. NHS England’s planning guidance for this year urged clinical commissioning groups to enforce penalties against trusts.
Checklist’s latest analysis could indicate that a £5,000 penalty for every patient waiting more than 52 weeks, which was introduced in April 2013, is beginning to take effect.
At the end of 2012 more than 1,000 patients had to wait more than 52 weeks for treatment after referral. By the end of 2013 this number had dropped to 317.
Anthony Thompson, a director at Checklist, said the 52-week fine would have a “huge effect”.
“If you’re a chief executive that’s a no-brainer to make sure that those patients do get treated.
“My sense is that the over 52 [weeks] waiter issue has largely gone away and the £5,000 fine has been quite effective.”
Under the new rules trusts are fined on a per patient basis for breaching the referral to treatment targets, rather than on the percentage of patients that have waited over the 18-week mark.
A 2.5% penalty cap on providers’ total monthly revenue has also been introduced.
Checklist’s analysis shows that this cap could significantly reduce the fines some trusts pay.
Barts Health Trust’s estimated uncapped fine of £8.3m would be reduced to £2.6m.
The “capped total” across all providers would be £86.7m, compared with an uncapped total of £117.8m.
A spokeswoman for NHS England urged caution in comparing the two sets of figures.
“Arrangements for 2014-15 have been made clearer and simpler and, because of these changes, it is difficult to directly compare the two,” she said.
“However, assuming there is no marked change in provider performance between the two years, our broad expectation is that overall sanctions imposed by commissioners will be no higher than in 2013-14 and, in some cases, providers that miss a standard by only a small margin in a particular period may face a lower sanction.”
A spokesman from Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust, which faces the highest levels of fines according to the analysis, said it had significantly cut its backlog of patients who had waited 18 weeks for treatment.
This was achieved “with support from the Trust Development Authority and the NHS Intensive Support Team”, he added.
“We are on track to achieve the target, as agreed with the TDA, in June 2014.
“We have not had any patients waiting over 52 weeks for treatment since a single patient in September 2013, and we have significantly reduced our numbers of patients waiting over 40 weeks down to seven currently.”
This article is courtesy from LGC Plus.
This showed that they would face less than £87m of fines in 2014-15 if the new rules and cap were applied. A similar study by Checklist in 2013 put the total penalties bill at £227m.
Checklist examined trust performance against targets for referral-to-treatment waits, 12-hour trolley waits, emergency admissions and cancelled operations, among others.
Trusts are likely to come under increasing pressure to hit performance targets in 2014-15. NHS England’s planning guidance for this year urged clinical commissioning groups to enforce penalties against trusts.
Checklist’s latest analysis could indicate that a £5,000 penalty for every patient waiting more than 52 weeks, which was introduced in April 2013, is beginning to take effect.
At the end of 2012 more than 1,000 patients had to wait more than 52 weeks for treatment after referral. By the end of 2013 this number had dropped to 317.
Anthony Thompson, a director at Checklist, said the 52-week fine would have a “huge effect”.
“If you’re a chief executive that’s a no-brainer to make sure that those patients do get treated.
“My sense is that the over 52 [weeks] waiter issue has largely gone away and the £5,000 fine has been quite effective.”
Under the new rules trusts are fined on a per patient basis for breaching the referral to treatment targets, rather than on the percentage of patients that have waited over the 18-week mark.
A 2.5% penalty cap on providers’ total monthly revenue has also been introduced.
Checklist’s analysis shows that this cap could significantly reduce the fines some trusts pay.
Barts Health Trust’s estimated uncapped fine of £8.3m would be reduced to £2.6m.
The “capped total” across all providers would be £86.7m, compared with an uncapped total of £117.8m.
A spokeswoman for NHS England urged caution in comparing the two sets of figures.
“Arrangements for 2014-15 have been made clearer and simpler and, because of these changes, it is difficult to directly compare the two,” she said.
“However, assuming there is no marked change in provider performance between the two years, our broad expectation is that overall sanctions imposed by commissioners will be no higher than in 2013-14 and, in some cases, providers that miss a standard by only a small margin in a particular period may face a lower sanction.”
A spokesman from Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust, which faces the highest levels of fines according to the analysis, said it had significantly cut its backlog of patients who had waited 18 weeks for treatment.
This was achieved “with support from the Trust Development Authority and the NHS Intensive Support Team”, he added.
“We are on track to achieve the target, as agreed with the TDA, in June 2014.
“We have not had any patients waiting over 52 weeks for treatment since a single patient in September 2013, and we have significantly reduced our numbers of patients waiting over 40 weeks down to seven currently.”
This article is courtesy from LGC Plus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)